RE: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion presented as fact

[KAREN ALLEN]

RE:  "I find it useless that homeowners are posting support for the 
designation without living in Spruce Hill."

I will assume that since I stated  in my previous writings that I do not 
live in Spruce Hill,  that you are referring to me. First of all, I did not 
see "For Spruce Hill Eyes Only" mentioned in the dozens of emails that have 
come in on this subject.  Secondly, I made it clear from the outset that I 
did not live in Spruce Hill and therefore did not have a direct stake in the 
outcome of this, and each reader could consider or not consider my opinion 
in light of that.  Thirdly, Councilwoman Blackwell's bill does not limit 
itself to Spruce Hill: this subject  affects the entire city at large, 
including me.  Finally, the last time I checked, this is still the United 
States of America, and everyone has a right to state his or her opinion in a 
public forum without having to get permission from anyone else.

I suppose that it is also equally useless that I raised some substantive 
issues that actually got people talking to each other about this.
Karen Allen






From: "S. Sharrieff Ali" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "S. Sharrieff Ali" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Charles H. Buchholtz'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion 
presented as fact
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 12:13:09 -0400

"Yes, the Historical Commission deals with paint colors.  No, the
Historical Commission doesn't deal with paint colors.  It all depends on
whether you are talking about what they are doing today, or what they
have the power to do if they so choose"
It is not as confusing as you are presenting it. The commission has the
authority to "deal"
with paint, that is the answer. Lets stick to the facts.
Brian, and many others (including myself) have been truthful in our
presentation
of the guidelines and current regulations. We have made them available
for those who
can read. Read the guidelines very carefully as if it was a contract.
The commission
has the power to regulate colors, a clear indication of their future
intent to exercise that
power when useful to the commission.
I am not against Historic Designation for Spruce Hill. I am against the
abusive process of designation. I am against the sweeping authority
given to the Historic Commission by the
City of Philadelphia.
I find it sad that many have posted comments on this listserv not being
familiar
with the code of enforcement. I find it useless that homeowners are
posting support for
the designation without living in Spruce Hill. I find it absurd that
many are not
understanding they will not have a voice in the matter unless they
protest.
The proponents have not asked for your vote and have put significant
dollars forth
acting on behalf of all property owners in Spruce Hill. The commission
does not
require property owners votes for designation. The property owners of
Spruce Hill
are mostly unaware or confused about the regulations and process.
None of the proponents have been reasonable or fair about any of this.
All of you are
derelict in your duties as community representatives and have not
followed any
responsible process to seeking the nomination of Spruce Hill. None of
you have ever
contacted me directly to sit down and discuss the proposal.  You all
know me and my
willingness to compromise. I have requested and been refused. You have
not showed to
debate in public. Your efforts are single minded.
Why do you chose to use this listserv as a forum for this debate?

What do you have to say about your arrogance thus far?

S.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles H.
Buchholtz
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 4:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion
presented as fact
   From:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Date:  Mon, 5 Apr 2004 14:58:17 EDT
   In a message dated 4/5/04 12:08:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

   <<... I'm still trying to find time to write back to Al Krigman, who
   mentioned to me that since I was asking about house painters, aren't
I glad we don't
   have an HD to get in the way of my plans (which is kind of ironic
because HDs
   typically don't deal with paint as an issue.) >>
   Philadelphia's local historic districts don't deal with paint colors,

   Elizabeth!  This is a scare tactic being used by the anti-HD's!

OK, just in case anyone hasn't heard this argument a dozen times, I'll
cut to the chase:
From the Historical Commission web site
   http://www.mfrconsultants.com/hc/permits.html#a
"What parts of a historic property does the Historical Commission
regulate? 

RE: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion presented as fact

[S. Sharrieff Ali]

"Yes, the Historical Commission deals with paint colors.  No, the
Historical Commission doesn't deal with paint colors.  It all depends on
whether you are talking about what they are doing today, or what they
have the power to do if they so choose"

It is not as confusing as you are presenting it. The commission has the
authority to "deal"
with paint, that is the answer. Lets stick to the facts.

Brian, and many others (including myself) have been truthful in our
presentation 
of the guidelines and current regulations. We have made them available
for those who 
can read. Read the guidelines very carefully as if it was a contract.
The commission
has the power to regulate colors, a clear indication of their future
intent to exercise that 
power when useful to the commission.

I am not against Historic Designation for Spruce Hill. I am against the
abusive process of designation. I am against the sweeping authority
given to the Historic Commission by the 
City of Philadelphia.

I find it sad that many have posted comments on this listserv not being
familiar 
with the code of enforcement. I find it useless that homeowners are
posting support for
the designation without living in Spruce Hill. I find it absurd that
many are not
understanding they will not have a voice in the matter unless they
protest.

The proponents have not asked for your vote and have put significant
dollars forth
acting on behalf of all property owners in Spruce Hill. The commission
does not 
require property owners votes for designation. The property owners of
Spruce Hill
are mostly unaware or confused about the regulations and process.

None of the proponents have been reasonable or fair about any of this.
All of you are
derelict in your duties as community representatives and have not
followed any 
responsible process to seeking the nomination of Spruce Hill. None of
you have ever
contacted me directly to sit down and discuss the proposal.  You all
know me and my
willingness to compromise. I have requested and been refused. You have
not showed to 
debate in public. Your efforts are single minded. 

Why do you chose to use this listserv as a forum for this debate?

What do you have to say about your arrogance thus far?

S.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles H.
Buchholtz
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 4:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion
presented as fact 

   From:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Date:  Mon, 5 Apr 2004 14:58:17 EDT

   
   In a message dated 4/5/04 12:08:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   
   <<... I'm still trying to find time to write back to Al Krigman, who 
   mentioned to me that since I was asking about house painters, aren't
I glad we don't 
   have an HD to get in the way of my plans (which is kind of ironic
because HDs 
   typically don't deal with paint as an issue.) >>
   
   Philadelphia's local historic districts don't deal with paint colors,

   Elizabeth!  This is a scare tactic being used by the anti-HD's!

OK, just in case anyone hasn't heard this argument a dozen times, I'll
cut to the chase:

>From the Historical Commission web site 
   http://www.mfrconsultants.com/hc/permits.html#a

"What parts of a historic property does the Historical Commission
regulate?  The Historical Commission reviews all work that requires a
permit or that may change the exterior appearance of a property. This
includes, for example, roofing, masonry cleaning, pointing and
***painting***, window and sash replacement, and window boxes. As a
matter
of policy, the Commission does not regulate the painting of exterior
trim."

Which I read to say that the Historical Commission has the right to
regulate painting, but currently chooses not to.

So, Al is right: The Historical Commission, on it's own web site,
clearly says that it reviews painting.  And Melani is right, their
current policy is not to regulate painting.

Yes, the Historical Commission deals with paint colors.  No, the
Historical Commission doesn't deal with paint colors.  It all depends
on whether you are talking about what they are doing today, or what
they have the power to do if they so choose.

--- Chip



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.

Re: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion presented as fact

[Charles H. Buchholtz]

   From:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Date:  Mon, 5 Apr 2004 14:58:17 EDT

   
   In a message dated 4/5/04 12:08:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   
   <<... I'm still trying to find time to write back to Al Krigman, who 
   mentioned to me that since I was asking about house painters, aren't I glad we 
don't 
   have an HD to get in the way of my plans (which is kind of ironic because HDs 
   typically don't deal with paint as an issue.) >>
   
   Philadelphia's local historic districts don't deal with paint colors, 
   Elizabeth!  This is a scare tactic being used by the anti-HD's!

OK, just in case anyone hasn't heard this argument a dozen times, I'll
cut to the chase:

>From the Hostorical Commission web site 
   http://www.mfrconsultants.com/hc/permits.html#a

"What parts of a historic property does the Historical Commission
regulate?  The Historical Commission reviews all work that requires a
permit or that may change the exterior appearance of a property. This
includes, for example, roofing, masonry cleaning, pointing and
***painting***, window and sash replacement, and window boxes. As a matter
of policy, the Commission does not regulate the painting of exterior
trim."

Which I read to say that the Historical Commission has the right to
regulate painting, but currently chooses not to.

So, Al is right: The Historical Commission, on it's own web site,
clearly says that it reviews painting.  And Melani is right, their
current policy is not to regulate painting.

Yes, the Historical Commission deals with paint colors.  No, the
Historical Commission doesn't deal with paint colors.  It all depends
on whether you are talking about what they are doing today, or what
they have the power to do if they so choose.

--- Chip



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion presented as fact

[Brian Siano]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

When I responded about <>, he told the list that <>

This is not, actually, a fact - merely his opinion - but when that is posted 
to the listserv as a fact, others (in this case, Jim Lilly and I) felt the 
need to CLARIFY that it isn't a fact.

How is this not a fact, Melani? The nomination process doesn't require 
democratic approval-- it requires the compilation and submission of a 
neighborhood inventory, and the reasons why a neighborhood should be 
preserved. It's expensive and time-consuming, but it doesn't require a 
vote to accomplish, and can be done by a small group of well-funded 
advocates. And the PHC's evaluation process does not require a vote of 
the residents of the proposed neighborhood. The decision over 
designation rests with the PHC, not with the neighborhood. These are 
facts, Melani.

If people didn't write untrue statements on the list, other people wouldn't 
need to point out that they are untrue.  If the anti-HD people didn't keep 
posting threatening emails about planned communities forcing people out of their 
homes, regulated paint colors, and suddenly-completed historic district 
designations with no local input, I don't think that those of us who are pro-HD would 
be bothering the rest of you at all.  (Except, of course, to make sure that 
you all receive NOTICE when the actual process starts, at which point everyone 
will have the opportunity to their voices heard.)
 

Actually, I agree with Melani on this point. If we critics (especially 
Al, who as the earliest I'd heard on the subject) didn't point out these 
problems with the HD proposal, the advocates wouldn't say boo on the 
subject, either-- and the first that many people would hear about it is 
when the _PHC_ performs its mandated public meetings.

Sorry to keep up the arguing, gang-- but when Melani accuses me of 
lying, making untrue statements, and general scare-mongering, I have to 
defend myself.


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion presented as fact

[MLamond]

In a message dated 4/5/04 12:08:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<<... I'm still trying to find time to write back to Al Krigman, who 
mentioned to me that since I was asking about house painters, aren't I glad we don't 
have an HD to get in the way of my plans (which is kind of ironic because HDs 
typically don't deal with paint as an issue.) >>

Philadelphia's local historic districts don't deal with paint colors, 
Elizabeth!  This is a scare tactic being used by the anti-HD's!

As I recall, this thread started last Thursday or Friday because Al posted a 
story decrying communities with extra rules, true to his Libertarian beliefs, 
and Kyle sort of wondered if it might help him with his neighbors whose trash 
finds its way to his sidewalk, causing him to get tickets.  Brian conjectured 
that nobody expects rules like this, upping the ante to <<...to be forced out 
of their home if they choose the wrong color for their paint trim, and neither 
do we expect our neighbors to turn into craven, sanctimonous aesthetics 
cops>>.  I wrote that places like the Dorchester Condominiums have had very strict 
appearance rules for years, and it doesn't seem to bother the occupants very 
much, and Brian turned the discussion right back to our proposed HD (NOT 
mentioned in my email!).  He asserted that the HD has <<...the potential for abuse, 
the arbitrary nature of the decisions, the lack of a proper appeals process, 
the suspension of our property rights, and  the secretive nature of the 
advocates throughout this whole process>>.  When I responded about <>, he told the list that <>

This is not, actually, a fact - merely his opinion - but when that is posted 
to the listserv as a fact, others (in this case, Jim Lilly and I) felt the 
need to CLARIFY that it isn't a fact.  I wasn't writing to change Brian's mind - 
I know that isn't going to happen - I wrote because I'm concerned that newer 
subscribers won't know that he is not explaining the long process for HD 
designation honestly or accurately - the process that has not yet begun, and 
requires notice to all and public meetings.  

If people didn't write untrue statements on the list, other people wouldn't 
need to point out that they are untrue.  If the anti-HD people didn't keep 
posting threatening emails about planned communities forcing people out of their 
homes, regulated paint colors, and suddenly-completed historic district 
designations with no local input, I don't think that those of us who are pro-HD would 
be bothering the rest of you at all.  (Except, of course, to make sure that 
you all receive NOTICE when the actual process starts, at which point everyone 
will have the opportunity to their voices heard.)

So, can we stick to the facts?  As long as no one else posts untrue follow-up 
about this topic, I will say nothing further!

Melani Lamond

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] HD nastiness

[Brian Siano]

Dubin, Elisabeth wrote:

I think discussion is important, and it's important to be accountable for our opinions.  But seriously, don't you guys have jobs or anything?  I'm still trying to find time to write back to Al Krigman, who mentioned to me that since I was asking about house painters, aren't I glad we don't have an HD to get in the way of my plans (which is kind of ironic because HDs typically don't deal with paint as an issue.)
 

Just one correction here, Elisabeth. The Pittsburgh HD had a controversy 
over its authority over house paint. The Pittsburgh HC, much like 
Philadelphia's, had authority over paint trim, but they did not exercise 
this authority. Then, one year, they decided to start exercising it. 
Needless to say, residents in existing HDs (who'd deen designated under 
the old rules) probably weren't very happy over that.

And this is one of our objections to the Philadelphia HD. As has been 
pointed out, the PHC _does_ have authority over what colors we can paint 
our houses-- in fact, they have authority over the entire envelope of 
the house, front, rear and sides. But they do not currently exercise 
this particular authority. However, if they _do_ decide to do so-- 
either on an individual basis, or as a change in general policy-- 
there's not a lot anyone can do about it. So, Al's concern isn't 
entirely misplaced.




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] HD nastiness

[Dubin, Elisabeth]

I agree with Paul.  I think none of us are going to convince the others of us to 
change our minds.  People tend to formulate an opinion based on gut reaction, then 
look for facts to back it up.  Then, once we have our facts, we accuse other people of 
not doing their homework.  The HD conversation has been giving me acid in my stomach 
lately because of the smug tone of it all.  (Ross, you have my permission to use that 
line to make fun of people like me.  "Aaah, I'm going to have to unsubscribe!  Aahh!  
Can't take it... any... more!!!")

I think discussion is important, and it's important to be accountable for our 
opinions.  But seriously, don't you guys have jobs or anything?  I'm still trying to 
find time to write back to Al Krigman, who mentioned to me that since I was asking 
about house painters, aren't I glad we don't have an HD to get in the way of my plans 
(which is kind of ironic because HDs typically don't deal with paint as an issue.)
Anyway, back to work, everyone!  

Sincerely,
your neighbor,
Elisabeth




HillierARCHITECTURE
Elisabeth Dubin

T 215.636. x4176 | C 610.506.7931 | F 215.636.9989
One South Penn Square | Philadelphia | PA | 19107-3502
www . hillier . com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 6:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [UC] HD nastiness


Note to all you hard core pro and anti historical designation people.  Your 
messages are testing the boundaries of civility.  You obviously will not convince each 
other.  I suspect that many of us lurkers find the discussion distasteful and 
unpersuasive.  (But please don't ask for a vote on that.)  My personal vote is that 
all of you take it off line and stop forcing your loud selves on the rest of us.  If 
you can't restrain yourself, how about trying to be concise?

Paul Uyehara
(have an opinion on HD but not interested in talking about it)


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.